Bill Overview
Title: DOD Energy Strategy Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense to consider, when developing and implementing the energy performance goals and energy performance master plan, the reliability and security of energy resources in the event of military conflict and the value of resourcing energy from U.S. allies, such as those in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
Sponsors: Sen. Ernst, Joni [R-IA]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals involved in defense sector energy production, supply, and utilization
Estimated Size: 1500000
- The DOD Energy Strategy Act of 2022 focuses on energy performance goals and securing reliable energy sources for the military.
- The target population includes individuals both within and outside the United States who rely on, or are engaged in, defense and energy sectors.
- Military personnel will be directly impacted by changes in energy strategy and procurement.
- Allied nations and their citizens involved in producing and supplying energy resources to the U.S. Pentagon will be impacted.
- Contractors and industry professionals within the defense energy sector will see changes in demand and investment, affecting their jobs and operations.
Reasoning
- The focus of the policy is on enhancing the reliability and security of energy resources related to defense, which will mainly affect individuals working within defense and energy sectors.
- The monetary budget allows for a sizable initial investment but spreads over a long timeline, mostly impacting those directly tied to defense energy production and logistics, and potentially causing minor indirect effects on related civilian sectors.
- The interviews will reflect differing levels of impact, depending on their involvement in the defense energy supply chain and indirect economic effects.
Simulated Interviews
Defense Logistics Coordinator (Norfolk, VA)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems aimed at making sure we have reliable energy resources, which is crucial for operations.
- Initially, I think it can complicate our supply chain management, but in the long run, it should stabilize our energy input.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Energy Sector Consultant (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This act will potentially increase demand for U.S.-allied energy suppliers, which could boost business.
- However, the changes might require us to adjust our sourcing strategies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
R&D Engineer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More focus on allied resources may shift the innovation landscape towards specific technologies.
- This might create more opportunities for new projects but also pressure to align with policy goals.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Army Infantry (Fayetteville, NC)
Age: 33 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone in field operations, having reliable energy resources is critical.
- The policy seems to strengthen our position but might not directly change my day-to-day.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Policy Analyst (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is a strategic move to balance energy sourcing aligned with national security.
- It backs my field of study, assuring the U.S. remains resilient against energy disruptions.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Energy Resource Manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The intent of the policy aligns with reducing dependency on unstable sources.
- However, in the short-term, it might require reassessment of our current suppliers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Trade Specialist (New York, NY)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy might prompt increased trading activities with allies, impacting my work.
- Increased workload but has potential benefits from stable trade relationships.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Civil Engineer (Denver, CO)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Depending on policy outcomes, we might see more projects requiring integration of allied technologies.
- Initial hiccups in project delivery could be expected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Energy Sector Investor (Chicago, IL)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A focused strategy in defense energy could open new opportunities for sustainable investments.
- However, it might require reevaluation of existing portfolios.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Defense Analyst (Boston, MA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy provides a clearer focus for our energy strategies in the defense sector.
- Expect shifts in priorities and possibly increased research funding.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $120000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $140000000)
Year 2: $125000000 (Low: $105000000, High: $145000000)
Year 3: $130000000 (Low: $110000000, High: $150000000)
Year 5: $140000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $160000000)
Year 10: $160000000 (Low: $140000000, High: $180000000)
Year 100: $240000000 (Low: $200000000, High: $280000000)
Key Considerations
- The reliance on allied nations for energy may lead to geopolitical implications if these relations are disrupted.
- Impact on current energy contractors and suppliers who might face competitive pressures or need to pivot in strategies.
- The feasibility of newly defined energy goals and the DOD's capacity to implement them without disrupting operations.
- The bill's approach to integrating NATO allies' energy capabilities and potential reliance on imported energy sources.
- Long-term sustainability and effectiveness of energy goals amid changing global energy landscapes.